If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

...given the team's public statements that they intended to be big players in the FA market this offseason, rolling with Nick for yet another year is a letdown...

This is the most interesting part of the story to me. Aside from the obvious on-field implications of the lack of FA activity for the Barves, their cold stove this winter seems to add fuel to the idea that their claims of financial improvement begetting better competitive performance was just a bill of goods.
I'm more interested in this as a local citizen than as a lapsed baseball fan, because as I've said ad nauseam, the Barves are dead to me. I'm curious to see how long fans put up with this before they start to clamor even louder against the current absentee ownership. Because the current trajectory isn't at all what was promised to Atlanta-area residents when they ponied up nearly half a billion bucks for that new stadium.

And it is doubly bad when a small market team does it. See Cincy/Joey Votto. Not that he has been awful(last year wasn't great), but the ensuing roster inflexibility means you can't make any mistakes.

Yup. Another case in point: Last year, the Twins gave Joe Mauer 20% of their team payroll to hit 6 dingers and put up a WAR of 1.2. In related news, the Twins finished a distant second in the worst division in baseball.

Interesting. If those numbers are correct, that would represent a bit of a loss for Harper. He goes to a place that was reportedly lowest on his destination wish list AND he gets substantially less AAV than either the Machado deal or the rumored offer from Washington.

Harper

13 years playing for a Philadelphia team is a long, long time.

As a Nats fan living in DC, I was ready for him to move on. I thought the Natsí offer last year was more than fair. And I wonít miss his very poor defense and his 110% hustle 75% of the time. He may have another MVP year in him, especially in that small park, of course, but Iíd rather sign Rendon to an extension.

Actually

Originally Posted by CDu

Interesting. If those numbers are correct, that would represent a bit of a loss for Harper. He goes to a place that was reportedly lowest on his destination wish list AND he gets substantially less AAV than either the Machado deal or the rumored offer from Washington.

The offer from the Nats apparently had significant deferrals, so the true AAV might have been less. Nats deal probably would have been better from a tax point of view, however. But Harper apparently really wanted to have the biggest FA contract ever. Of course, Betts and Trout may soon break that record.

The offer from the Nats apparently had significant deferrals, so the true AAV might have been less. Nats deal probably would have been better from a tax point of view, however. But Harper apparently really wanted to have the biggest FA contract ever. Of course, Betts and Trout may soon break that record.

Also, I saw a quote from Boras claiming (I personally think it is a lot of spin) that Harper wanted the longest deal possible and wants to stay in one place for the rest of his career, and that was more important to him than AAV.

Also, I saw a quote from Boras claiming (I personally think it is a lot of spin) that Harper wanted the longest deal possible and wants to stay in one place for the rest of his career, and that was more important to him than AAV.

No one knows what the future holds, but if he ages poorly, at least he's locked himself into a forgiving fanbase.

Yep

Originally Posted by CrazyNotCrazie

Also, I saw a quote from Boras claiming (I personally think it is a lot of spin) that Harper wanted the longest deal possible and wants to stay in one place for the rest of his career, and that was more important to him than AAV.

Also, I saw a quote from Boras claiming (I personally think it is a lot of spin) that Harper wanted the longest deal possible and wants to stay in one place for the rest of his career, and that was more important to him than AAV.

23+ million $$$ average will provide the chance for generational security.

Also, I saw a quote from Boras claiming (I personally think it is a lot of spin) that Harper wanted the longest deal possible and wants to stay in one place for the rest of his career, and that was more important to him than AAV.

Originally Posted by MChambers

100% spin. Boras is good at that.

Yeah, that is definitely spin. I think this was a case of an agent/player misreading the market, and trying to make lemonade out of lemons. It is a significantly worse deal than what Machado got (way less AAV, no opt-out) despite Harper being supposedly the best free agent target (based on age and talent) to hit the open market since ARod.

It is still GREAT money, but not nearly the deal folks were expecting. Especially given what Machado got.

The offer from the Nats apparently had significant deferrals, so the true AAV might have been less. Nats deal probably would have been better from a tax point of view, however. But Harper apparently really wanted to have the biggest FA contract ever. Of course, Betts and Trout may soon break that record.

I get the feeling that the Nats were ready to move on (they have their outfield, invested $ into pitching and saving for Rendon, and didnít love Bryce in the clubhouse), and their $300 M offer (with substantial deferralas as you mention) was a public marker as a favor to Boras. The Nats have done a lot with Boras over the years with Stras and Scherzer, and have Rendon coming up, so I think the public $300M/10 was for Boras to use as a negotiation lever with other teams. Obviously as more time passed folks realized there was not that kind of market for Bryce. Iím actually surprised he got what he did as recent rumors were that he wouldnít even get to the $300 the Nats had ďofferedĒ.

As for the merits of the Nats offer, Iím not sure how deferrals work. Do they take the nominal amount and spread it out over a longer time, or is there an inflation factor built in? Without an inflationary component the NPV would be much much worse with a deferred contract. Also from a tax perspective I could argue that longer is worse since the current tax rates will expire in a few years raising the top bracket back up to where it was prior. Though who can guess what tax rates will do over 13 years.

No one knows what the future holds, but if he ages poorly, at least he's locked himself into a forgiving fanbase.

That contract will be movable in its last few years unless he just completely falls apart. $22 million by 2030 isn't going to be a franchise-crippling figure. The Phillies just got a lot better for the next few years at least, and probably improved their team long-term without wrecking their financial flexibility. 13 years is a long time but if you're ever going to bet on a guy, you bet on the 26 year old who has a great track record of being productive and durable.

That contract will be movable in its last few years unless he just completely falls apart. $22 million by 2030 isn't going to be a franchise-crippling figure. The Phillies just got a lot better for the next few years at least, and probably improved their team long-term without wrecking their financial flexibility. 13 years is a long time but if you're ever going to bet on a guy, you bet on the 26 year old who has a great track record of being productive and durable.

Harper was amazing at age 22 in 2015. He was pretty amazing in 2017, but only able to play 111 games. He's been productive, but not amazing, in other years, including hitting in the 240s in 2 of the past 3 years, perhaps playing hurt some in those years. If he plays like 2015 and 2017, that would be a HOF player just turning 26. Agree that $22 million won't look as big in 2030.

That contract will be movable in its last few years unless he just completely falls apart. $22 million by 2030 isn't going to be a franchise-crippling figure. The Phillies just got a lot better for the next few years at least, and probably improved their team long-term without wrecking their financial flexibility. 13 years is a long time but if you're ever going to bet on a guy, you bet on the 26 year old who has a great track record of being productive and durable.

Plus I think the Phillies are betting the DH comes to the NL before the end of Harpers deal